Bounce flash?

Merlin5

Merlin5

Merlin5

Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
18,611
Location
Finchley, London
A member called Khaaan was asked in the desk gallery about his photo lighting. Someone asked him what his lighting is as his pics always come out spot on.
He said "My room lighting is uplit and ambient but I do use bounce flash which helps"
Here's one of his pics:
http://robbiekhan.co.uk/root/photos/stuff-room/desk_dualscreens.jpg

I would like to achieve the same quality as him. Here's a couple of mine.
http://i.imagehost.org/0335/Lamp1.jpg
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/6315/imgp3376c.jpg

Now according to camerasummary.com, he has a Canon EOS 40D which seems to be worth around £800, and I just have an old Pentax Optio S30. So can I achieve the same lighting by buying some sort of external bounce flash unit, or would I need to spend lots of money on a new camera?
 
Sorry, your camera neither has a hotshoe to mount a flash, nor any connection to attach one with a cable. You wouldn't need to spend £800, but you would need to spend money.
 
Mud said:
Sorry, your camera neither has a hotshoe to mount a flash, nor any connection to attach one with a cable. You wouldn't need to spend £800, but you would need to spend money.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I was actually stupidly thinking of buying some sort of external flash unit that doesn't necessarily connect to the camera, but of course, the flash has to be timed exactly when the picture is taken, so it has to be connected. Doh!

Alright then, so, what is the cheapest camera you could recommend to give me the same quality, and is bounce flash always a separate piece of equipment, or do some cameras come with it? As you can tell, I'm totally ignorant on this stuff. :o
 
bounce flash just means to bounce the light off of something like a ceiling or wall

so only seperate flash guns will give you this option as flash built in to cameras do not give you the option to tilt them

so you would need a camera that allowed for a flash to be connected, a lens (or few) for that camera and a flash gun
 
Last edited:
A few bridge camera's have flash hotshoes which would be the cheapest way I suspect - the Canon G11 does as I recall, that and a cheap flash gun could likely be had new for £400 or so, less second hand...

But that's about as cheap as this gets...
 
Johnny|lucidcomposure said:
Yeah we know mrk well in here!
That picture of his is pretty much nothing but bounced light from the roof using an external flash unit.
Camera isn't really anything to do about it if it supports a hotshoe mounted flash.
Click to expand...

So really, the cheapest camera around with a hotshoe will give the same quality and definition? I found a Canon G11 for £329 new from hong kong, just don't know if they send grey imports or not. Also, there seems to be a flashgun called a Miranda 430TCB going for £12, would that work?
 
Souljacker said:
You could get a 2nd hand Canon EOS 30D for that money. Couple that with an okay Nissin flashgun and you'd be good to go. :)
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, thanks, I see them going for about £250, that's more like it :p
Much difference between the 30D and the 40D? And I presume from what you're saying is that the 30D is a superior camera to the G11?

About flashguns, I see Nissins ranging from £25 (Nissin 132AF Canon Dedicated Flashgun) up to £250. Will the cheapest one do?
 
Merlin5 said:
Ah, yes, thanks, I see them going for about £250, that's more like it :p
Much difference between the 30D and the 40D? And I presume from what you're saying is that the 30D is a superior camera to the G11?

About flashguns, I see Nissins ranging from £25 (Nissin 132AF Canon Dedicated Flashgun) up to £250. Will the cheapest one do?
Click to expand...

You'll need a lens for the 30D as well, unless you have a desire to get seriously into photography that's not a terribly good route to go down IMO...
 
Welcome to the world of photography.

Not only will you need a body (canon 350D / 400D / 1000D) you need to find a external flash gun and get a lens to go. There are variations which one you need depending how wide you want to go and also then get the right settings is another story...
 
bigredshark said:
You'll need a lens for the 30D as well, unless you have a desire to get seriously into photography that's not a terribly good route to go down IMO...
Click to expand...

I don't really follow. If the G11 and the 30D both need a lens, are you just saying that it's cheaper to get a lens for the G11?
 
Merlin5 said:
I don't really follow. If the G11 and the 30D both need a lens, are you just saying that it's cheaper to get a lens for the G11?
Click to expand...

You don't need and lens for the G11 or other bridge cameras.

You do need a lens for the 30D or any other DSLR camera.


What exactly is it you want to photography? Anything in particular, or do you just want a better camera for achieving more professional shots?
 
D.P. said:
You don't need and lens for the G11 or other bridge cameras.

You do need a lens for the 30D or any other DSLR camera.
Click to expand...

Got it.


D.P. said:
What exactly is it you want to photography? Anything in particular, or do you just want a better camera for achieving more professional shots?
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose just more professional shots. I think my little compact does decent macro like these ones I took

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/6566/imgp2946.jpg
http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/1056/imgp2990.jpg
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/682/imgp2997r.jpg
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/3852/imgp2989.jpg

But for room shots and anything that doesn't have good natural light, I need a good flash system and generally better quality camera for better detail. Of course, looking through the post your pictures gallery inspires me to want to take things a bit further and frame some nice subjects and then make use of photoshop as well.
 
If you're looking to try to recreate the effect it basically involves firing the flash at a wall or ceiling, which in turn lights the subject in the manor you desire (commonly bouncing flash off the ceiling to create a "more natural" lighting effect, for example).

Holding a small mirror at the correct angle to your inbuilt flash may help show you what was possible with a more comprehensive and advanced kit. (Warning: getting into photography in a serious way may ruin your life/bank managers life :p )
 
Merlin5 said:
Got it.




Well, I suppose just more professional shots. I think my little compact does decent macro like these ones I took

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/6566/imgp2946.jpg
http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/1056/imgp2990.jpg
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/682/imgp2997r.jpg
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/3852/imgp2989.jpg

But for room shots and anything that doesn't have good natural light, I need a good flash system and generally better quality camera for better detail. Of course, looking through the post your pictures gallery inspires me to want to take things a bit further and frame some nice subjects and then make use of photoshop as well.
Click to expand...


Then I think it is really a question of what effort you want to put into the photography, how much you want to take control of everything, how much flexibility you want, etc.

Bridge cameras can take great photos and are very practical. DSLRs generally do everything a little better, somethings much better. But you may not be interested in the things that an SLR can really do.

One thing for sure is that using SLRs can get very expensive, although this is often by choice more than anything (people want the latest and greatest). A bridge camera is just as good for many situations for the average person.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom